[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
If you are in the population that never does tfs hates the markets and solos story arcs its a plus.
Is there some reason you think these three things go together?
[/ QUOTE ]
That is the only population this is a plus for.
[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
So, it's really a lose/lose situation, as far as the devs' perspective goes.
Bolded for emphasis. Do try and actually read what people say, instead of what you want to read.
[/ QUOTE ]
My point is and was they have decided to fix a non problem (People speeding through TFs for rewards)
There was never a reason to make it a lose lose. And the players have tools to respond to the choice.
Edit: let me elaborate
Problems:
1. The players didn't like getting crap drops from TFs
2. Some felt they were getting ripped by the market
3. The root problem of the prior 2. Players wanted to max out their characters in what felt like a reasonable amount of time .
4. Developer perceived problem of too many recipes available on markets
5. Developer perceived problem of certain content being done far too much.
Solutions
1. Don't like the random roll (Its optional)
2. Don't like the market we provide a complete bypass. (Problem is this will hurt everyone that used the market but so what we cater to minority groups of malcontents (art mirrors life)) (and also hurt them but its going to take them a while to realize that)
3. Reduce the total supply of recipes markedly.
4. Punish anyone that didnt have an enormous amount of time for the game.
5. Punish players for having a content pref. By making said content less preferable.
6. Discourage farming by making the rewards of the activity more valuable.
/e faceplant on keyboard.
After the joy I had with MPBT (With that game it got so bad the players built alternatives to the developers proposals and even got to staging runs to demonstrate just how in error they were) I was certain I would avoid any other game where the developers started showing these levels of disconnect. When the players have to start explaining the consequences to the devs and are pointedly pointedly not listened to , Or in this case receive a basket of well crafted non responses to the questions with the most wiggle room its a real problem.
For this game its like the first whifs of spoiled milk in the fridge. Its time to get new milk you don't need to clean out the fridge with bleach yet. (The combination of this and throwing the existing PVPers under the bus isn't really hopeful though).
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you are in the population that never does tfs hates the markets and solos story arcs its a plus.
[/ QUOTE ]
Is there some reason you think these three things go together?
[/ QUOTE ]
Must me talking about me. 
(Well, I don't hate the market, but I don't use it much.)
Yes, the new merit system is a plus for me. I see the current incarnation as an overall nerf for players, but for me it will give me access to a number of recipes that are currently beyond me. It will take me a long time to accumulate enough merits to buy anything, but I'll get there some day.
So... sorry, folks, but I can't really complain about the new merit system. 
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, the new merit system is a plus for me. I see the current incarnation as an overall nerf for players, but for me it will give me access to a number of recipes that are currently beyond me. It will take me a long time to accumulate enough merits to buy anything, but I'll get there some day.
[/ QUOTE ]
There is the sadness. There was no reason it couldn't have been a plus for everyone.
Hi:
As long as the metric for number of merits is time, the game will be tedium not fun; it penalizes folks for being organized, ingenious, team oriented and what not. Frankly I had hoped the merit system would fix the very defective recipe drops at end of TFs, and in a way it does; sadly in the way of fixing it, they now broke the entire TF system. If folks do not do Positrons often, is because they are too long, repetitive, and therefore boring. So now, we are punished from playing the fun TFs by receiving no reward to speak off, and encourage us to do the TFs that we might as well be lobotomised and do.
Shudders
Stormy
[ QUOTE ]
So now, we are punished from playing the fun TFs by receiving no reward to speak off,
[/ QUOTE ]That's only true if the only TFs you consider to be fun are Eden and Katie.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So now, we are punished from playing the fun TFs by receiving no reward to speak off,
[/ QUOTE ]That's only true if the only TFs you consider to be fun are Eden and Katie.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're relatively punished for running the ITF, LRSF, STF, and LGTF under the new system. These are generally more difficult to successfully complete for the average team than older, longer, grindier TFs but give as little as half the rewards of them.
When skilled and powerful players who today favor those TFs for challenge and enjoyment are instead lured into older grindier TFs for their vastly superior rewards, we've already been over what's going to happen.
The basic flaw here is that the merits system is designed to reward time, not meeting challenges that require skill or effort.
"Experience is the mother of good judgement. Bad judgement is the father of experience."
[ QUOTE ]
You're relatively punished for running the ITF, LRSF, STF, and LGTF under the new system. These are generally more difficult to successfully complete for the average team than older, longer, grindier TFs but give as little as half the rewards of them.
[/ QUOTE ]...once again, you missed my point. It's still a reward. Whether you think it's worth it, that's a different story...but it's not "no reward to speak of".
[ QUOTE ]
When skilled and powerful players who today favor those TFs for challenge and enjoyment are instead lured into older grindier TFs for their vastly superior rewards, we've already been over what's going to happen.
[/ QUOTE ]
They're going to run two different skill-based TFs in the same time it's supposed to take to run one grind-based TF and earn pretty close to the same merits?
Even comparing optimized teams for Grindforces to optimized teams for Skillforces, you're probably going to come out pretty close to the same time investment for the same rewards.
The system provides options, and doesn't force anyone to do anything. Your idea of "luring" assumes that the people who run the Skillforces are going to be willing to give up all of their powers and bonuses to exemplar down and grind out Posi or Synapse, or subject themselves to the slog through the Shadow Shard, when they could instead be running multiple different more challenging pieces of content back to back, at full power, for comparable rewards. I don't think that's a safe assumption to make about how this system is going to be played past about 3 weeks in, when people realize that boring content is still boring content, and fast content adds up rewards as fast as or faster than boring content can let them grind it out.
My postings to this forum are not to be used as data in any research study without my express written consent.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're relatively punished for running the ITF, LRSF, STF, and LGTF under the new system. These are generally more difficult to successfully complete for the average team than older, longer, grindier TFs but give as little as half the rewards of them.
[/ QUOTE ]...once again, you missed my point. It's still a reward. Whether you think it's worth it, that's a different story...but it's not "no reward to speak of".
[/ QUOTE ]
So your point is that specifically, literally speaking as long as something gives a merit or two, it has a reward? That's semantics and completely misses, or perhaps intentionally, ignores the actual point behind the complaints against the merit system being based on median average times.
The point you are overlooking with your quibble over the definition of 'no reward at all' is that you're rewarded heavily for doing boring, 4-year-old, grindy TFs quickly, over doing recent, more interesting, and more difficult TFs at all, under the merits system.
It takes much longer to organize and perform a successful pickup STF or LRSF than it does to get 2 people to pad you in steel canyon while you start posi, then kick them and solo it, and the rewards don't reflect that at all.
I didn't make any judgement about how many merits were worth it, if you want to get your semantics messed with in return. The judgement I'm making is that the system's set up with its rewards inverted - rewarding people heavily for shortcutting through something boring as fast as possible, rather than rewarding them heavily for tackling difficult challenges in a 'normal play' manner.
Hamidon and the Silver Mantis SF are maybe the only merit values I think they actually got right.
"Experience is the mother of good judgement. Bad judgement is the father of experience."
[ QUOTE ]
They're going to run two different skill-based TFs in the same time it's supposed to take to run one grind-based TF and earn pretty close to the same merits?
Even comparing optimized teams for Grindforces to optimized teams for Skillforces, you're probably going to come out pretty close to the same time investment for the same rewards.
The system provides options, and doesn't force anyone to do anything. Your idea of "luring" assumes that the people who run the Skillforces are going to be willing to give up all of their powers and bonuses to exemplar down and grind out Posi or Synapse, or subject themselves to the slog through the Shadow Shard, when they could instead be running multiple different more challenging pieces of content back to back, at full power, for comparable rewards. I don't think that's a safe assumption to make about how this system is going to be played past about 3 weeks in, when people realize that boring content is still boring content, and fast content adds up rewards as fast as or faster than boring content can let them grind it out.
[/ QUOTE ]
The key difference is, you can solo Posi and 2 or 3 man Synapse and it'll be faster than a full team in most cases. To do a 'speed/skill' ITF, STF, or LRSF you need at least 5 or 6 skilled players with the correct builds.
The only people who'll be banging out a 30 minute ITF, 45 minute STF and 45 minute LGTF back to back to back will be people in SGs like RO who've set up teams specifically to do these things.
Everyone else will be soloing positron 2 or 3 times a day because it's alot easier and there's no lead time for setting up. Like I said, 2 padders to start.
"Experience is the mother of good judgement. Bad judgement is the father of experience."
[ QUOTE ]
The key difference is, you can solo Posi and 2 or 3 man Synapse and it'll be faster than a full team in most cases. To do a 'speed/skill' ITF, STF, or LRSF you need at least 5 or 6 skilled players with the correct builds.
[/ QUOTE ]
One big reason for smaller teams running faster is a lack of bosses.
For example, Manticore must have a very different time to complete it if you drop the team down to 5.
Oddly, this flies in the face of Risk-v-Reward. Perhaps the Merits for TFs should have some scaling or bonus for larger teams beating a TF. Note that the "difficulty" bonus that the STF and LRSF got could perhaps relate to how those TFs are almost unbeatable shorthanded, so that could in a way be a large-team bonus - the other TFs should have that, too.
Probably. But manticore's at a level where you can has fulcrum shift, so going back to a full team with "optimal loadout" of buffer/debuffer members is practical to blow through it...
It just doesn't give as many merits as positron because people already broadly cut through swathes of it by stealthing with no motivation other than getting it over with faster.
"Experience is the mother of good judgement. Bad judgement is the father of experience."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're relatively punished for running the ITF, LRSF, STF, and LGTF under the new system. These are generally more difficult to successfully complete for the average team than older, longer, grindier TFs but give as little as half the rewards of them.
[/ QUOTE ]...once again, you missed my point. It's still a reward. Whether you think it's worth it, that's a different story...but it's not "no reward to speak of".
[/ QUOTE ]
"Ever the fraking apple polisher!" - (Azrael, Former Muse)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
City of Heroes didn't fail, City of Heroes was killed. If a 747 dropped on your house, you'd say you were killed, not you failed to find a safer dwelling.
|
QR
On the subject of random rolls, I did an experiment. I have run ten TFs since the merit system details were put out, and I have kept track of my drops.
4/10 - Useless to any of my alts.
Edict of the Master Damage
Malaise Proc
Call of the Sandman Acc/Rech/Sleep
Pacing of the Turtle Proc
2/10 - Generally held to be of limited value, but I do have some alts who could use those sets.
Performance Shifter Rech/Acc
Dark Watcher Rech/End
2/10 - Moderately useful to me. They're from good sets, but they are procs and I don't put very many procs in my builds.
Positron Proc
Devastation Proc
2/10 - Useful pieces, ones that I can use in a number of my alts.
Scirocco Dam/Acc/End
LotG End/Rech
So by this quick sample, I got 60% that was useful in *any* way, and only 20% that was what I could call universally useful to me. Those odds just aren't good enough for me to waste merits on random rolls.
"Home is where, when you have to go there, they have to let you in."
[ QUOTE ]
So by this quick sample, I got 60% that was useful in *any* way, and only 20% that was what I could call universally useful to me. Those odds just aren't good enough for me to waste merits on random rolls.
[/ QUOTE ]
10 rolls is 200 merits, which we'll round off to say is any one IO of your choice.
you'd rather have taken 1 of your choice instead of 10 rolls that yielded 6 that were useful?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So by this quick sample, I got 60% that was useful in *any* way, and only 20% that was what I could call universally useful to me. Those odds just aren't good enough for me to waste merits on random rolls.
[/ QUOTE ]
10 rolls is 200 merits, which we'll round off to say is any one IO of your choice.
you'd rather have taken 1 of your choice instead of 10 rolls that yielded 6 that were useful?
[/ QUOTE ]
But 4 of those 6 fall into the 'a little goes a long way' category. In other words, after getting a couple of them they would fall into the 'useless to me' category. So in the long run, I am trading 2 probably useful recipes for one dead certainty of exactly what I need.
"Home is where, when you have to go there, they have to let you in."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So by this quick sample, I got 60% that was useful in *any* way, and only 20% that was what I could call universally useful to me. Those odds just aren't good enough for me to waste merits on random rolls.
[/ QUOTE ]
10 rolls is 200 merits, which we'll round off to say is any one IO of your choice.
you'd rather have taken 1 of your choice instead of 10 rolls that yielded 6 that were useful?
[/ QUOTE ]
But 4 of those 6 fall into the 'a little goes a long way' category. In other words, after getting a couple of them they would fall into the 'useless to me' category. So in the long run, I am trading 2 probably useful recipes for one dead certainty of exactly what I need.
[/ QUOTE ]
Which, to me, is the strength of the system. You get to choose what you value - the certainty of the single reward, or the chance to get multiple useful things.
Yes, there is a single best choice for ROI (though that will shift over time), but there is room for different people with different playstyles to make different choices and each be happy with what they've done. And people who complain over being screwed by the RNG now have no one to blame but themselves.
My postings to this forum are not to be used as data in any research study without my express written consent.
[ QUOTE ]
QR
On the subject of random rolls, I did an experiment. I have run ten TFs since the merit system details were put out, and I have kept track of my drops.
4/10 - Useless to any of my alts.
Edict of the Master Damage
Malaise Proc
Call of the Sandman Acc/Rech/Sleep
Pacing of the Turtle Proc
2/10 - Generally held to be of limited value, but I do have some alts who could use those sets.
Performance Shifter Rech/Acc
Dark Watcher Rech/End
2/10 - Moderately useful to me. They're from good sets, but they are procs and I don't put very many procs in my builds.
Positron Proc
Devastation Proc
2/10 - Useful pieces, ones that I can use in a number of my alts.
Scirocco Dam/Acc/End
LotG End/Rech
So by this quick sample, I got 60% that was useful in *any* way, and only 20% that was what I could call universally useful to me. Those odds just aren't good enough for me to waste merits on random rolls.
[/ QUOTE ]
Now see, on most of my builds...I only find the Devastation Proc useful, and that's on a very limited number of my builds.
BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They can take care of the speed runs, with Diminishing Returns.
With my example on KHTF, it's merits won't go up much. You get the OMG lots of merits quick, then if you run it a 2nd time, you get...1/2 that.
[/ QUOTE ]Unless they find a way to use Diminishing Returns on multiple characters...no, they can't. People will just do as they've always done, and run multiple Edens back to back, just on different characters.
[/ QUOTE ]
You can't trade merits, so what would it matter if they did do multiple runs on multiple characters?
As for Katie Hannon TF, they're giving 7 merits (that assumes the avergae 35 min KHTF), what did I say the average seemed like? 45-60 minutes, so all that does is increase the amount of merits to 9-12.
Do a second run with the same hero, it lowers to 4-6 merits.
Now Positron would get one big boost in amount of merits in what I consider the avg. time to be for it. But I also run it with 8 man teams, and tend to run it with a few lower lvl (if not all) in the team.
But again...I have to ask. Who cares? And if they do, why?
So /some/ people can speed thru a TF. So /some/ people will get more merits. So what? Why even care about it?
BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection
I think you must have gotten my post mixed up with someone else, cause your novel really has nothing to do with what "I" said..
The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.
[ QUOTE ]
I think you must have gotten my post mixed up with someone else, cause your novel really has nothing to do with what "I" said..
[/ QUOTE ]
OK then, you waited this long to post *that*. Wow - must be grumpy this morning.
You said:
[ QUOTE ]
What I want to know is after 4 years of promoting alts why the devs do something like this that is so strongly anti-alt. It makes it look like they don't know what they are doing when they do stupid stuff like this.
[/ QUOTE ]
I said - tl;dr - the devs only don't know what they are doing if they *intend* for merits to be anti-alt. Because neither you, nor they can *prove* what impact merits will have on alt-ing.
So it seemed a bit premature to be calling them incompetent.
I also think that at this point the only likely merit changes are ones that can be supported by *objective* measures - not belief. But now I've certainly crept into novella length, so I'll stop.
You must need some coffee or something cause what you are saying makes no sense. I never called anyone incompetent.
In terms of the anti alt comment, it was not my intent to prove anything. The lack of the ability to trade merits is anti-alt if you are trying to save say 240 merits for one of the shinny IO's. You are esssentailly forced into having one merit toon if you want to get that shinny anytime soon.
Others have essentially said the same thing I was just echoing it.
The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.
Quote
Poster: Paradox1
Q: The Story Arc merit system seems to encourage us to solo non-TF missions, as running other people's story arcs earns 0 merits (unless we happen to have the same arc open). Is this really the way you want to encourage us to play the game?
A: While only offering Merits upon story arc completion to the owner of the story arc is consistent with our original reward system (only the mission owner earns the bonus story arc XP and gets to choose the SO enhancement) we understand that there is certainly room for improvement upon this. We will evaluate our options on how we can improve the rewards for party members along for the ride on a story arc.
end Quote
This one really bothers me. Character ATs that have problems soloing, will be completely dependent on others. I'm trying to imagine my Emp/Dark def running the Striga story arc with Dark Blast and Gloom.
[ QUOTE ]
They can take care of the speed runs, with Diminishing Returns.
With my example on KHTF, it's merits won't go up much. You get the OMG lots of merits quick, then if you run it a 2nd time, you get...1/2 that.
[/ QUOTE ]Unless they find a way to use Diminishing Returns on multiple characters...no, they can't. People will just do as they've always done, and run multiple Edens back to back, just on different characters.